Best Practices for Solar

Risk Management

A practical guide for financiers of solar projects and portfolios

2017 Edition

As part of its ongoing effort to codify industry best practices, SEIA invited kWh Analytics
and other members of the SEIA Solar Energy Finance Advisory Council to jointly author
this document. Additional support provided by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Orange
Button Program.

1
Introduction
Tax equity and debt investment in solar energy projects require complex due
diligence and oversight by investors. Fortunately, the industry has matured greatly over the
past decade, and industry stakeholders have developed highly effective risk management
techniques to improve the quality of project cash flows and reduce the risk of technological and
credit-related risk factors.

This analysis was written for bank risk managers, credit officers, and senior business leaders who
recognize a wide range of potential risk factors pertaining to solar investments and seek a
systematic distillation of the industry’s best practices. Since the risk management function begins
at origination, the audience also includes those within the sales or origination function at banks
or within project finance groups at solar companies. This report assumes that a reader has a basic
competence in project finance and tax equity structures. This guide is designed to provide an
authoritative perspective on solar risk management, as this document reflects experiences and
learnings drawn from investors representing more than 50% of the U.S. market.

In this report, we contrast “risk management,” which is the responsibility of a financial investor,
to “asset management,” which is typically the domain of a solar company to maintain the
physical asset and the associated contractual arrangements. For our purposes, asset management
also includes the administration of an operations and maintenance program. Risk management
covers the investor’s responsibility to satisfy the internal business and compliance requirements
of senior business leaders, credit committees, internal and external auditors, and regulators. The
responsibility of the risk manager is to identify items that may lead to the financial deterioration
of an investment, and proactively work to resolve these situations. Although much of the data is
derived by the asset manager, a key role of the risk manager is to “trust, but verify” the results
being presented to them.

While solar investments are sometimes called “passive investments” due to the nature of the
structured vehicles, this is in practice a misnomer: Nearly every major investor in the renewable
energy markets have staff dedicated to risk management. Fortunately, there are a number of
practices and platforms in the market for financial investors to monitor, measure, and manage
their risk. These best practices are common between various segments of the solar industry,
ranging from distributed residential portfolios to utility-scale assets, and are the topic of this
report.

2
Executive Summary of Best Practices
Risk Measurement
Operational Risk
One of the most fundamental risk management practices calls for ongoing monitoring of the
actual electricity generation against projected electricity generation. This is often a leading
indicator of cash flow risk to an investor and acts as an early warning detection system. It’s also
important to separate underlying failures from short-term temporal impacts due to weather.
Investors need to know if the system is working to an acceptable standard (often 90-95% of
original projections), and if not, ensure that a plan is in place to remedy the situation or impair
the asset.

Regulatory and Counterparty Risk

Unfortunately, nearly every large portfolio to date has seen the insolvency of a key vendor or
sponsor. In this context, it is important for investors to know their exposure and any potential
liabilities that may exist. Reviewing investment allocations and historic operating history may
inform a warranty claim, a spare parts strategy, or a modification to O&M practices.

Offtaker Risk
Measuring and normalizing delinquency and default metrics allow investors to rely upon historic
performance to manage their risk and inform new investment opportunities. For distributed
portfolios, it is critical to define a materiality threshold of non-payment beyond which an
investor would define the individual asset to be non-performing.

Repayment Risk
Ensuring that cash flows meet an investment vehicle’s obligations, including loan payments and
tax equity’s preferred return (after expenses and taxes have been paid), is a core requirement for
any asset-backed investment vehicle. Tracking cash flows and coverage ratios are an essential
requirement to satisfy credit and compliance obligations in all investments, including solar.

Tax Risk
Investors at all levels of the capital stack typically have some sort of exposure to tax credits –
whether in the form of indemnities, insurance, cash sweeps, or extended flip dates. Tax equity
investors typically track this exposure closely, and it is best practice for lenders to watch it
closely as well.

Regular Reporting
Compliance management requires consistent communication with credit teams and senior
management, generally under a monthly-quarterly-annual review cadence: monthly production
look-backs, quarterly portfolio summaries, and annual portfolio reviews. These reports
incorporate production results, cash management tracking, exposure analysis, offtaker credit
updates, and other pertinent information about the health of their portfolio.

3
Industry Standards and Benchmarks
Use industry-standard protocols
Industry trade groups have established “generally accepted compliance practices” to further the
growth of the industry. These include: The United States Department of Energy's Orange Button
data standard; model contracts; installation and O&M best practices; and consumer protection
best practices.

Origination Standards
Risk management starts at origination, and risk managers work with originations teams to define
the data and reports that should be provided over the lifetime of the investment. API access
should be negotiated into agreements at this stage to ensure automated access to ongoing asset
performance data. The originations and risk management teams should also agree on final project
budgets.

Performance Benchmarking
“Industry comps” can be effective when evaluating the quality of an investment. Large solar
developers use it to compare the health of projects within their own portfolios. An emerging
trend is for investors to utilize industry data to benchmark their portfolios’ operating health and
payment performance against anonymized, aggregated data sets compiling data from other
operating portfolios.

Component Benchmarking
Risk managers can identify latent risks that may exist within portfolios by reviewing industry
benchmarking data on equipment underperformance or regional performance trends.

Compliant Infrastructure
Asset-level system of record
Banks need a system of record. However, solar transactions typically don’t readily conform to
pre-existing system of record formats, either due to the structure of the deals to support tax
motivated investors, or due to its dual nature as both an energy and financial asset. While a few
investors have overhauled internal databases to manage their fleet, most are relying on risk
management software designed specifically to satisfy the particulars of the renewable energy
industry.

Independent verification
Third-party validation of reported results, run through data quality tests, can unearth surprising
conclusions about the health of distributed solar fleets. Independent experts can provide an
element of compliance support to ensure the data being used to manage risk is reliable for
decision-making.

4
Risk Management Checklist

Risk Measurement Industry Standards and Compliance

1. Operational Risk
2. Regulatory and
Counterparty Risk
3. Offtaker Credit Risk
4. Repayment Risk
5. Tax Risk
6. Regular Reporting
Benchmarks
7. Industry Standards 11. System of Record
8. Origination Standards 12. Independent
9. Performance Benchmarking Verification
10. Component Benchmarking

 1. Tracking of Performance Index

 1.1 Tracking of Weather-Adjusted Performance Index
 2. Tracking Allocations
 2.1 Vendors
 2.2 Geographies
 2.3 Utilities
 2.4 Offtaker Credit Quality
 2.5 Service Providers
 2.6 Sponsors
 3. Tracking Delinquencies and Defaults
 3.1 Standardized Definitions
 4. Tracking Cash Flows
 4.1 Tracking of Coverage Ratios
 4.2 Standardized Labeling of Transactions in Ledger of Record
 5. Tax Risk Tracking
 6. Risk Reporting
 7. Industry Standard Protocols
 7.1 Orange Button
 7.2 Model Contracts
 7.3 Installation and O&M Best Practices
 7.4 Consumer Protection Best Practices
 8. Negotiated Data Sets during Origination
 8.1 API Access for Monitoring Platforms
 8.2 Agreement on Project Budget
 9. Use of Relative Metrics for Industry Context
 10. Component Benchmarking
 11. Use of System of Record
 11.1 Asset-Level Tracking
 11.2 Adequate Security Controls
 12. Independent Data Verification

5
Section 1: Measurement is the first step to Managing Risk
Arguably the most important role of a risk management professional is to measure and
communicate risk factors to others within their organization. There are areas that risk managers
are measuring to track the financial health of solar investment portfolios:

1. Operational Risk
Projections of future energy production drive the financial model and, in most circumstances, the
size of the investor’s financial exposure. Performance Guarantees may be granted to an offtaker
or an investor based on these projections, and production insurance policies are underwritten to
these projections.

After an investment has been made, the actual energy production can be viewed as one of the
most important indicators of risk to an investor. The ratio of the actual electricity generated to
the initial projection is called its “Production Index.” Investors need to know if the system is
working to an acceptable standard, which is often 90-95% of original projections, and if not,
ensure that a plan is in place to remedy the situation.

From a risk management standpoint, the Performance Index is important for the following
reasons:
• Under-production presents cash flow risk in situations where there is a Power Purchase
Agreement (PPA) in place with the offtaker, since the cash flows are a direct function of
electricity production. However, even when the offtaker has signed a lease or a loan,
production guarantees may still be in place that must be paid out if performance dips
below certain thresholds.
• In situations where a direct lease or loan is provided to the energy consumer, the
production is an important driver of credit risk, since it is commonly believed that end
users are less likely to make timely lease or loan payments if the asset is malfunctioning
or materially underperforming. This is relevant in the residential and commercial
segments of the market.
• Production informs the underlying asset’s value, on which investors are reliant for myriad
reasons. For example, a lender may look to the collateral as a secondary source of
repayment, a mini-perm lender is reliant on an operating asset to support a future
refinancing, and a tax-equity investor may need a quality asset to justify booked residual
values. The production also drives the resale value for an equity investor in the asset.
• In projects with production insurance, actual production values are necessary to support
the claims process.

Investors also calculate and track a Weather-Adjusted Performance Index, which adjusts the
Performance Index to reflect how the project or portfolio performed, independent of the impact
of weather. This is important for assets of all sizes, including residential portfolios, in order to
separate short-term, non-controllable variances from longer-term, systemic failures that need to
be proactively resolved by the solar asset manager. Third party service providers can calculate
and/or insure against these risks for investors. This has the dual benefit of enabling investors to
quickly access this information for risk management purposes, as well as improving relationships
with investment customers by identifying underperforming assets from poor weather without
continually asking for explanations from their asset management counterparts.
6
2. Regulatory and Counterparty Credit Risk
Unfortunately, solar is a volatile market– nearly every large portfolio to date has seen the
insolvency of a key vendor or sponsor. The regulatory environment also continues to evolve,
with examples of retroactive changes in net-metering policy and changes to renewable energy
credit incentive structures. In this context, it is important for investors to get ahead of potential
disruptions by, at a minimum, proactively measuring their exposure to potential liabilities.
Reviewing investment allocations and historic operating history may inform a warranty claim, a
spare parts strategy, or a modification to O&M practices. But without knowing the risk, investors
cannot act.

Many investors track their exposures both at an individual investment level (e.g., a project or a
fund), as well as at the entire portfolio level. Common allocation measurements include
equipment type (modules, inverters, and tracker manufacturers), state or geographic region,
utility, offtaker credit quality, service providers, and sponsor. While some investors may choose
to proactively manage their allocations for new investments to achieve portfolio diversification,
others may use this information to assess their risk exposure due to a specific negative portfolio
event.

Proactively managing allocations--and quantifying the resultant risk--then informs various

mitigation strategies that investors may elect to pursue. For example, significant exposure to a
solar developer may inform a modification to the approach of asset management, such as
outsourcing asset management to third parties or procuring back-up services from independent
parties. Large exposure to volatile geographies or equipment types may inform the investor’s
approach to production insurance procurement. Similar credit risks that reside in many different
investments (for example, funds with credit exposure to the same corporate entity offtakers) may
need to be aggregated for reporting and tracking at an institutional level.

3. Offtaker Credit Risk

A key component of measuring credit risk is the financial health of those obligated to pay the
bills. This is approached differently in residential vs. non-residential portfolios, but the end goal
is the same.

In non-residential portfolios, traditional measures of credit health are typically used to monitor
credit risk. This includes traditional financial analysis or, when available, independent credit
ratings from a rating agency such as Standard & Poor’s or Moody’s. This task may be managed
by specialized credit groups or within a risk management team directly, and is frequently
complemented with monitoring of public news releases. If a solar plant is located atop a facility
that is closing, for example, the investor can proactively work with the asset manager to devise a
mitigation approach or scope the potential impact on the cash flows from the portfolio. A real
property analysis is sometimes performed to scope potential recoveries if a facility were to be
vacated.

For residential portfolios, metrics of financial health are only now beginning to emerge. Whereas
in other asset classes a ‘default’ is clearly defined as 90+ or 120+ days of nonpayment, the solar
industry is only now identifying the relevant metrics for residential portfolios. Many investors
are tracking contracts with 90+ days of nonpayment as materially delinquent, even if an official

7
contractual default has not been called. However, historically, there is a higher probability of
consumers becoming current on their payments after material non-payment occurs, which is
much less common in other industries. As such, investors are separately measuring contract
reassignments, renegotiations or write-offs, as well as resolution statistics, to determine the
impact on cash flow. A big challenge facing investors is normalizing these metrics across
portfolios, and many are turning to specialized technology solutions to support this process.

Fig. 1: Sample reassignment statistics from a residential developer’s earnings call.

4. Repayment Risk
Ensuring that cash flows meet an investment vehicle’s obligations is a core requirement for any
asset-backed investment vehicle. Tracking actual cash flows against projected cash flows, as well
as the resultant coverage ratios, is critical to satisfying credit and compliance obligations in all
investments, including solar.

There may be differences between pure credit risk, as defined above, and the ability for an
investment vehicle to fulfill its payment obligations. These contributing factors include increased
expenses, operational issues, and poor servicing quality (such as the inability to send a timely
invoice). Tracking cash flows enables a risk manager to measure the extent of the various risk
factors within a transaction.

8
This is often more difficult than tracking a Performance Index. Depending on the financing
structure, there may be upwards of five bank accounts per project (such as revenue accounts,
reserve accounts, and sweep accounts). For investors that are tracking cash flows closely, and
receiving copies of the bank or servicing reports, it’s important to work with the solar asset
managers to label transactions consistently within the ledger so that the transactions can be
audited at a later date. Cash flows may be categorized in the following types and subtypes:

Transaction Type Transaction Subtype

Revenue Electricity Revenue

Lease Revenue
SREC Revenue
Prepayments
Rebates
Fees
Contract buyouts
Reimbursements

Contra-revenue Refunds
(Negative cash flows that are not expenses) Performance Guarantee Payments
Referral credits

Expenses Operations and Maintenance Expense

Asset Management Expense
Insurance Expense
Property Tax
Site Lease
Other Expense

Other Transfer to another account

Transfer from another account

For transactions that include debt, or for sale leaseback transactions, cash flows and debt service
coverage ratios are critical to determining covenant compliance. In these transactions, there are
often compliance obligations whereby a portfolio that generates fewer cash flows than expected
must deposit cash into a new reserve account for the benefit of the lenders until the cash flows
recover. Independently reviewing the financials ensures satisfactory compliance with these
obligations.

Some structures, particularly in the debt market, are structured to have a balloon payment at a
date certain in the future. In order for their debt to be repaid, they are typically relying on a
developer to refinance their loan. To evaluate this risk, some lenders also look at how successful
solar companies are at recycling or accessing capital in the market, and running sensitivities
based on projected interest rates.

9
5. Tax Risk
Investors at all levels of the capital stack typically have some sort of exposure to tax credits –
whether in the form of basis indemnities, tax recapture insurance, cash sweeps, or extended flip
dates. Tax equity investors typically track this exposure closely, and it is best practice for lenders
and others involved in the transaction to watch it closely as well. In highly structured, tax-
motivated investments, if cash is king, then tax equity may be considered the queen - they form a
partnership wherein both have to work together in order for everything to function properly.

Risk managers should be knowledgeable of the tax equity structure and how changes in the
realized tax benefits impact return or flow through the project finance model. Typically both
need to work in unison for all investors to achieve their target return. The key tax metrics to track
are the projected and realized tax benefits, which are themselves a function of the fair market
value of the assets, any tax recapture, and the prevailing tax rate.

6. Regular Risk Reporting

Investors who are most focused on compliance management and keeping senior management and
credit teams up-to-date on their portfolio generally have a Monthly-Quarterly-Annual review
cadence: monthly production look-backs, quarterly portfolio summaries, and annual portfolio
reviews.

Monthly look-backs are often focused on production metrics and the Performance Index of a
portfolio, with a particular emphasis on identifying underperforming assets and working with
asset managers to resolve any problems in the field. Best practice is to report results for both a
Performance Index and Weather Adjusted Performance Index.

Quarterly reports may include additional data points such as cash distributions to the investor, a
refreshed allocations analysis, or a discussion of material credit events within the portfolio.

Annual reports are often more fulsome in nature and include a refreshed credit underwriting of
the important stakeholders, discussion of collateral or residual value, updates of the relationship
with each of the third parties, any changes in the broader market, a discussion of third parties
supporting the risk management function, and other topics as may be pertinent to the portfolio.

Senior credit managers don’t like surprises, so keeping them informed as issues arise is critical to
the success of any portfolio manager.

Section 2: Leverage Industry Standards and Benchmarks

Collaboration with asset owners, other investors, and independent third parties can enhance one’s
risk management practices.

7. Use industry-standard protocols

Industry groups have invested significant time and financial investment into the development of
standards to be leveraged by the solar industry. A number of these can be leveraged by risk
managers as a way to adopt “generally accepted compliance practices” that have already been
vetted and agreed upon by the industry

10
Orange Button, a program of the U.S. Department of Energy SunShot Initiative, has organized
the creation and adoption of industry-led open data standards. The Orange Button Data Standard
is a taxonomy for solar data transfer and reporting. The final specifications for this standard are
expected to be available by late 2017 / early 2018, and Orange Button-compliant applications are
being developed to support the use of this standard.

Fig. 2: A sample data field from the draft Orange Button taxonomy.

Model Contracts – SEIA and a former working group led by National Renewable Energy Lab
(NREL) developed a suite of model commercial and residential solar contracts (including both
PPAs and leases). These documents were developed by dozens of leading solar companies, law
firms, financiers, and other stakeholders to create legal consistency throughout the market and in
turn eliminating transactional burden and allowing the cash flows to be pooled into larger,
tradable securities. The model contracts are available here: https://www.seia.org/research-
resources/model-leases-and-ppas

Installation and O&M Best Practices – SEIA and NREL continue to refine installation and
operation and maintenance best practices in order to drive high quality and consistent
development and management practices and protocols. The best practices are available here:

11
https://www.seia.org/research-resources/industry-backed-best-practices-guides-aim-lower-
financing-costs-solar-energy

Consumer Protection Best Practices – Accurate salesmanship and marketing of solar to

residential customers has become a critical issue in the asset class. SEIA has led the industry
with critical resources and guidelines for its members, available here:
https://www.seia.org/initiatives/consumer-protection

8. Risk Management Begins at Origination

Risk management is a process that starts well before the investment is made, and there should be
collaboration between the origination team and the risk management team at a financial
institution. As discussed earlier in this report, there are some key metrics and data points that
should be monitored on a regular basis by risk managers, and the provision of data is often
negotiated as part of the financing package. Unfortunately, it is common for each investor to
negotiate different reporting packages on each transaction, leading to an unwieldy process of
data preparation by the solar asset manager and data collection by the risk management team.
Risk Management Software vendors provide software packages to investors that consolidate and
aggregate the pertinent portfolio data, easing the burden of report generation on sponsors.
Additionally, use of the Orange Button standard could streamline the way data is transmitted
between the parties.

Risk managers should work with their origination team to agree on the set of reports and data
fields. Whereas in the past some banks had individuals logging into different monitoring
platforms simply to collect data, it is becoming common practice for investors to require
automated access to the data. Many are negotiating access to an Application Programming
Interface (API) from which the bank or a third-party can access the solar project’s production
data, free of charge. Most data acquisition systems offer this functionality, and the use of an API
enables a portfolio to scale more easily.

The origination team is also responsible for setting and validating a project budget within a
closing pro forma. This includes estimating revenues (and therefore production estimates,
degradation rates, and default rates), as well as expenses. For the pro forma, the estimated O&M
cost should equal the cost of full replacement of those services by another provider. These
estimates should include scheduled and unscheduled outages, major maintenance, and inverter
replacements. Other expenses may need to be budgeted as well, such as property taxes, asset
management fees, accounting fees, filing fees, LLC fees, bank fees, trustee fees, and collateral
agency fees. Many banks also like to structure deals to ensure the owner of the facility is
incentivized to keep their projects a priority for any operational issues that may arise, such as by
requiring a minimum rate of return for the project sponsor. Risk managers should work with the
origination team to agree on a project budget prior to the close of financing.

9. Performance Benchmarking Puts Operations in Context

Absolute metrics of performance against projected values achieve specific goals related to
portfolio performance, but the reality is that the pro forma projections are the results of a ‘best
guess’ at the time the solar project was built. With over a million operating solar power plants in
the United States, there is additional value in utilizing relative metrics to compare how a given

12
project or portfolio is performing relative to others in the industry. This exercise can help
determine if an asset is underperforming due to poor technical quality, or simply due to overly
aggressive underwriting estimates.

For example, much can be learned by comparing the operational performance of an asset against
others operating in a similar region. A risk manager can begin to answer questions such as:
• Is the facility performing in-line with others in the industry?
• Is the facility being maintained adequately?
• Are the pyranometers calibrated appropriately?
• Is the asset manager utilizing best practices in clearing snow from the facility?

To identify the quality and operational health of an asset, it’s critical to put it within the context
of an ecosystem of other operating solar projects.

When it comes to underwriting the credit quality of a portfolio, data products have recently come
to the market that shed light on the historical payment quality of various portfolios. In the
residential market, proxy asset classes (such as mortgages or home improvement loans) could be
used to estimate defaults, but increasingly investors are looking to historical payment trends of
solar portfolios themselves as a superior input to project annual default rates. Similarly, in the
non-residential market, many investors underwrite a solar project’s offtaker as they would a
commercial loan and take a binary bet on credit quality for up to 25 years--an audaciously long
time--when industry data could be used to better understand the frequency of contract
restructurings or defaults, and the causes. This is particularly true for non-investment-grade
entities and for emerging segments of the solar market, such as community solar.

Benchmarking investments against each other can take multiple forms. At the simplest, an
investor can compare each of their investments against one another. However, single investor
portfolios are often limited in scope, and many investors subscribe to services that enable them to
gain access to performance indices, which provide insight into performance characteristics of the
entire solar industry. These indices are aggregated from historical data and anonymized in such a
way as to conceal the performance characteristics of each individual asset. The solar industry is
still early in the use of industry data for decision making, but it is becoming clear that this
information will be used to stratify and value assets based on their relative quality against
industry indices.

10. Component Benchmarking to Identify Latent Risks

In addition to comparing asset portfolios against one another, a key responsibility of a risk
manager is to project if there are any anticipated risks to the investment until such time as the
loan is repaid or the investor is otherwise out of the transaction. This necessitates risk managers
to “see around corners,” or identify potentially latent defects within a portfolio that could have
negative impacts on the investment portfolio.

Similar to asset indices, performance data from elsewhere in the industry is being utilized for
component benchmarks. These are used to identify performance issues experienced by other,
anonymized assets in the pursuit of drawing out risk factors. By using this approach, analytics
firms can draw key insights, such as whether certain pieces of equipment are experiencing

13
increased failures at a certain point in the asset life cycle, what system degradation rates are
being realized in the field for different pieces of equipment, or if equipment failures are more
closely associated with different climate zones.

Risk managers can utilize these component benchmarks to identify latent risks that may reside
within their investment portfolios and proactively develop strategies to mitigate any potential
risks that may exist.

Section 3: Robust Compliance Infrastructure

A centralized system of record for solar investments is an essential piece to supporting
compliance requirements from regulators and auditors.

11. Systems of Record: Asset level information, institutional-grade IT security

It is best practice to keep a centralized system of record for the data associated with renewable
energy portfolios. This achieves dual goals of a centralized database as a compliance mechanism
to ensure the data is maintained with adequate controls, in addition to a shared source of truth
among team members.

Tracking data at the asset level is now common within the industry and is performed by more
than half of the tax equity suppliers, even for residential portfolios with a large quantity of
systems. This level of detail enables a deeper view into how changes in the composition of a
portfolio will impact the cash flows, such as when customers renegotiate or default on contracts,
or how regulatory changes may impact cash flows. Additionally, asset-level detail enables
benchmarking against industry indices, as discussed elsewhere in this report.

Some investors have internal systems of record that they modify for their renewable energy
transactions, which store a history of the key metrics for solar portfolios and, in some cases,
generate reports which feed into corporate accounting platforms. In practice, there are many
aspects of renewable energy that make modification of existing databases challenging, such as:
• There are many specific data fields specific to solar, both regarding the systems as
installed and the ongoing types of data being generated by the solar projects. This results
in significant modification to existing databases that may already exist within a financial
institution.
• Due to lack of standardized data and lack of data science expertise within renewable
energy teams, high-value employees are doing data entry tasks. This is using high-cost
personnel for low-value work, and on a task that erodes job satisfaction for top-level
employees.
• Solar transactions may cover a large volume of solar assets, particularly for those made
within the residential and small commercial segments. Many databases are not designed
to store tens of thousands of systems in a scalable manner.

Due to the challenges above, many investors turn to third-party vendors designed to address the
specific challenges listed above to manage their systems of record. Qualified vendors will have
functionality designed to meet the specific needs of the risk manager and a product that can meet
the rigorous security requirements of regulated institutions. This includes adequate internal
controls, external validations (such as penetration tests), and adequate business insurance. For
14
investors considering working with independent third parties on this service, a reference list of
other regulated institutions who are already customers is an important vetting mechanism.

Fig. 3: An example of an asset-level database is the HelioStats Risk Management software by

kWh Analytics, Inc.

An additional benefit of working with independent third parties is an independent verification of

the data being delivered from the solar asset manager.

Systems of record exist in other industries, such as institutional products for equipment lease
groups or for banks financing commercial loans. These systems of record are typically tailored to
satisfy the particular needs of the chosen financial product. Some of these may be applied to
solar – such as leasing software to manage a sale-leaseback transaction – but when applied to
solar, they may be necessary but not sufficient. For example financial investors may still run
lease accounting off of a leasing software, but complement these applications with solar-specific
systems of record to manage fund-level cashflows and manage the particular risks of the solar
asset class.

12. Independent Verification of Reported Results

All the data in the world won’t adequately support the risk management function if the data is of
questionable quality. The risk manager is almost always reliant on the solar asset manager to
provide reliable and timely data and reports in order to fulfill their own compliance obligations.
Because solar is a growth industry, it is important for investors to recognize that there will be
challenges working with the data, at least until better data standards such as Orange Button are

15
widely adopted. However, there are mitigation strategies that can be employed to ensure that
quality data is being used for decision making.

Examples of frequently identified challenges with the data include:

• Reported system production that is outside of an acceptable range, e.g., a negative
Performance Index or one exceeding 200%.
• Reported system production that does not include a Weather Adjusted Performance
Index.
• Missing data fields, including situations where the asset manager does not provide key
data points due to imprecise negotiations during the origination process.
• For reported data fields, systems reporting null data for extended periods of time.
• Allocations tracked inconsistently, e.g., tracking exposure to Yingli and Yingli Solar as
two different module vendors.

In most instances, automated checks can be run on reported data to quickly identify data quality
issues. Some investors prefer working with third-parties to perform this service, as it is rooted in
data science and falls outside their core expertise as a financial institution, and provides an
independent source of validation to satisfy internal compliance requirements. There are dozens
of data quality checks that should be performed to ensure reliable data is used for reporting and
decision making purposes.

Conclusion
Although solar is still a relatively new industry for financial investors, the industry has
developed standards and practices on how to measure and manage the risk for investors who
have exposure to solar portfolios. The authors hope this guide provides a comprehensive
overview of the pertinent risks and management techniques used in the industry today by
investors who have exposure to the asset class.

16
 Solar Energy Industries Association
600 14th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005
www.seia.org

kWh Analytics, Inc.

230 California Street, Suite 303
San Francisco, CA 94111
www.kwhanalytics.com

17